Appendix 7.2 Phase 1 Habitat and NVC Survey

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Appendix 7.2 Phase 1 Habitat and NVC Survey Appendix 7.2 Phase 1 Habitat and NVC Survey ENERGY ISLES WIND FARM i APPENDIX 7.2 This page is intentionally blank. ENERGY ISLES WIND FARM ii APPENDIX 7.2 botanæco Yell Phase 1 Habitats & National Vegetation Classification Prepared by: Dr Andy McMullen Date: 20th of September, 2016 Tel: 0791 864 2223 Email: [email protected] Web: www.botanaeco.co.uk Contents 1 Executive Summary ........................................................................... 1 2 Introduction ...................................................................................... 2 Commission ........................................................................................................ 2 Aim & Objectives ................................................................................................. 2 Background ........................................................................................................ 2 3 Methods ............................................................................................. 3 Desk study ......................................................................................................... 3 Survey ............................................................................................................... 3 Phase 1 Habitat Survey ............................................................................... 3 National Vegetation Classification (NVC) ........................................................ 3 Nomenclature ............................................................................................. 4 Guidance ............................................................................................................ 4 Assessment ........................................................................................................ 5 Conservation Priorities ................................................................................. 5 Notable Species .......................................................................................... 5 Groundwater Dependent Terrestrial Ecosystems ............................................. 5 4 Baseline ............................................................................................. 6 Desk study ......................................................................................................... 6 Notable species .......................................................................................... 6 Designated Sites ....................................................................................... 10 Habitats and Vegetation ..................................................................................... 10 Site Habitat Description ............................................................................. 10 Habitats and their Associated Vegetation Communities .................................. 15 5 Assessment ..................................................................................... 31 Conservation Priorities ....................................................................................... 31 Habitats ................................................................................................... 31 Locations ................................................................................................. 35 Notable Species ........................................................................................ 36 Groundwater Dependent Terrestrial Ecosystems .................................................... 36 Tables Table 1: Legislated or listed species in the OS 10km grid squares in which the site is located. .... 7 Table 2: List of Phase 1 habitats and their absolute and relative areas. .................................. 14 Table 3: List of Phase 1 habitats and corresponding National Vegetation Classification plant communities..................................................................................................................... 18 Table 4: List of unimproved, acid grassland NVC communities and their habitat(s). ................. 22 Table 5: Phase 1 habitats and National Vegetation Classification plant communities and their relation to designations of the EU Habitats Directive, Scottish Biodiversity List and Living Shetland, the Local Biodiversity Action Plan (LBAP). ............................................................................ 32 Table 6: Potentially Groundwater Dependent Terrestrial Ecosystems within the site; their guidance- stated and site-specific groundwater dependency; and the reasoning for their site-specific assessment. ..................................................................................................................... 37 Figures Figure 1: Phase 1 Habitat Map.......................................................................................... 10 Figure 2: NVC communities map....................................................................................... 11 Figure 3: GWDTE in buffer zone ........................................................................... Appendix 3 Figure 4: Woodland relicts ................................................................................... Appendix 4 Appendices Appendix 1: Target Notes Appendix 2: Plant species list Appendix 3: Groundwater Dependent Terrestrial Ecosystem buffer zone survey Appendix 4: Woodland relicts Appendix 5: Figure 1: Phase 1 Habitat map Figure 2: NVC communities botanæco 1 Executive Summary Botanæco was commissioned by Energy Isles to undertake a combined Phase 1 Habitat / National Vegetation Classification (NVC) survey and an assessment of groundwater dependent ecosystems in connection with an area of land (hereafter referred to as ‘the Site’), located to the south of the small village of Gloup on the Isle of Yell (Shetland) at central Ordnance Survey Grid Reference: HP 493 007. The surveys, which were completed in July 2016, were undertaken to inform a proposed wind farm development within the Site (‘the Proposed Development’). A desk study established that biological recording activity within the Site is limited although previous records exist for a number non-floral species. The Phase 1 Habitat and National Vegetation Classification (NVC) survey established the Site was dominated by blanket bog, in addition to the following habitats, which were recorded within the Site and wider study area: acid grassland, unimproved; acid grassland, semi- improved; calcareous grassland, unimproved; marshy grassland; acid, dry, dwarf shrub heath; flush and spring: acid/neutral; flush and spring: basic; bare peat; oligotrophic / dystrophic loch; and maritime cliff & slope: coastal grassland. Notable plant species in terms of nature conservation were not confirmed with the Site. However, an unidentified hawkweed (Hieracium spp.) was recorded at one location at the head of Gloup Voe that may be of note; and the genus as a whole is included in the out-of- date Local Biodiversity Action Plan. The following habitats are identified as priorities for nature conservation: blanket bog (NVC communities M1, M2, M3 & M17b; also including M29); calcareous grassland (NVC community CG10a); and oligotrophic /dystrophic lochans. One location at the head of Gloup Voe, was observed as being notable for the following elements: woodland relicts; CG10a calcareous grassland; and hawkweeds (Hieracium spp.). Seven of the NVC communities recorded are potentially highly groundwater dependent Groundwater Dependent Terrestrial Ecosystems (GWDTEs). In a site-specific context, high groundwater dependency is only attributed to one GWDTE NVC community (M10a) in one single location. The low groundwater dependency of the remaining potential GWDTEs reflects the dominance of rain-fed blanket bog habitat and associated surface water drainage. Yell: Phase 1 Habitats & NVC 1 March 2019 botanæco 2 Introduction Commission Botanæco was commissioned by Energy Isles to undertake a combined Phase 1 Habitat and National Vegetation Classification (NVC) survey, and an assessment of groundwater dependent ecosystems in connection with a proposed wind farm development (‘the Proposed Development’) on Yell, Shetland. This habitat and vegetation data is required to inform a development layout within the Proposed Development Site (‘the Site’). Aim & Objectives The aim of the commission was to provide an ecological account of the habitats and vegetation communities present within the Site boundary (refer to Figure 1) with reference to the following specific objectives: x a desk study to identify known records of notable species; x production of Phase 1 Habitat and NVC vegetation maps; x target notes recording polygon-specific data or point-based features (including evidence of protected faunal species); x description of the habitats and vegetation communities; and x assessment of the groundwater dependency, with specific reference to potential Ground Water Dependant Terrestrial Ecosystems (GWDTE). Background The Site is located in the north-west of Yell, one of the Shetland Islands, at altitudes between sea level and 112m (on the Hill of Vigon). Wind speeds and rainfall are high across the islands but temperatures and the topography are moderate in both their scale and range. As a result, the vegetation is upland in character, waterlogged and dominated by blanket bog and other mire types, with areas of grassland in the more sheltered valleys and on better-drained slopes. The grasslands are especially important for the grazing of sheep – the main land use in the area. Waterbodies are widespread as a result
Recommended publications
  • Heathland Wind Farm Technical Appendix A8.1: Habitat Surveys
    HEATHLAND WIND FARM TECHNICAL APPENDIX A8.1: HABITAT SURVEYS JANAURY 2021 Prepared By: Harding Ecology on behalf of: Arcus Consultancy Services 7th Floor 144 West George Street Glasgow G2 2HG T +44 (0)141 221 9997 l E [email protected] w www.arcusconsulting.co.uk Registered in England & Wales No. 5644976 Habitat Survey Report Heathland Wind Farm TABLE OF CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................................................. 1 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 2 1.1 Background .................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Site Description .............................................................................................. 2 2 METHODS .................................................................................................................. 3 2.1 Desk Study...................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Field Survey .................................................................................................... 3 2.3 Survey Limitations .......................................................................................... 5 3 RESULTS .................................................................................................................... 6 3.1 Desk Study.....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 2: Plant Lists
    Appendix 2: Plant Lists Master List and Section Lists Mahlon Dickerson Reservation Botanical Survey and Stewardship Assessment Wild Ridge Plants, LLC 2015 2015 MASTER PLANT LIST MAHLON DICKERSON RESERVATION SCIENTIFIC NAME NATIVENESS S-RANK CC PLANT HABIT # OF SECTIONS Acalypha rhomboidea Native 1 Forb 9 Acer palmatum Invasive 0 Tree 1 Acer pensylvanicum Native 7 Tree 2 Acer platanoides Invasive 0 Tree 4 Acer rubrum Native 3 Tree 27 Acer saccharum Native 5 Tree 24 Achillea millefolium Native 0 Forb 18 Acorus calamus Alien 0 Forb 1 Actaea pachypoda Native 5 Forb 10 Adiantum pedatum Native 7 Fern 7 Ageratina altissima v. altissima Native 3 Forb 23 Agrimonia gryposepala Native 4 Forb 4 Agrostis canina Alien 0 Graminoid 2 Agrostis gigantea Alien 0 Graminoid 8 Agrostis hyemalis Native 2 Graminoid 3 Agrostis perennans Native 5 Graminoid 18 Agrostis stolonifera Invasive 0 Graminoid 3 Ailanthus altissima Invasive 0 Tree 8 Ajuga reptans Invasive 0 Forb 3 Alisma subcordatum Native 3 Forb 3 Alliaria petiolata Invasive 0 Forb 17 Allium tricoccum Native 8 Forb 3 Allium vineale Alien 0 Forb 2 Alnus incana ssp rugosa Native 6 Shrub 5 Alnus serrulata Native 4 Shrub 3 Ambrosia artemisiifolia Native 0 Forb 14 Amelanchier arborea Native 7 Tree 26 Amphicarpaea bracteata Native 4 Vine, herbaceous 18 2015 MASTER PLANT LIST MAHLON DICKERSON RESERVATION SCIENTIFIC NAME NATIVENESS S-RANK CC PLANT HABIT # OF SECTIONS Anagallis arvensis Alien 0 Forb 4 Anaphalis margaritacea Native 2 Forb 3 Andropogon gerardii Native 4 Graminoid 1 Andropogon virginicus Native 2 Graminoid 1 Anemone americana Native 9 Forb 6 Anemone quinquefolia Native 7 Forb 13 Anemone virginiana Native 4 Forb 5 Antennaria neglecta Native 2 Forb 2 Antennaria neodioica ssp.
    [Show full text]
  • Species List For: Labarque Creek CA 750 Species Jefferson County Date Participants Location 4/19/2006 Nels Holmberg Plant Survey
    Species List for: LaBarque Creek CA 750 Species Jefferson County Date Participants Location 4/19/2006 Nels Holmberg Plant Survey 5/15/2006 Nels Holmberg Plant Survey 5/16/2006 Nels Holmberg, George Yatskievych, and Rex Plant Survey Hill 5/22/2006 Nels Holmberg and WGNSS Botany Group Plant Survey 5/6/2006 Nels Holmberg Plant Survey Multiple Visits Nels Holmberg, John Atwood and Others LaBarque Creek Watershed - Bryophytes Bryophte List compiled by Nels Holmberg Multiple Visits Nels Holmberg and Many WGNSS and MONPS LaBarque Creek Watershed - Vascular Plants visits from 2005 to 2016 Vascular Plant List compiled by Nels Holmberg Species Name (Synonym) Common Name Family COFC COFW Acalypha monococca (A. gracilescens var. monococca) one-seeded mercury Euphorbiaceae 3 5 Acalypha rhomboidea rhombic copperleaf Euphorbiaceae 1 3 Acalypha virginica Virginia copperleaf Euphorbiaceae 2 3 Acer negundo var. undetermined box elder Sapindaceae 1 0 Acer rubrum var. undetermined red maple Sapindaceae 5 0 Acer saccharinum silver maple Sapindaceae 2 -3 Acer saccharum var. undetermined sugar maple Sapindaceae 5 3 Achillea millefolium yarrow Asteraceae/Anthemideae 1 3 Actaea pachypoda white baneberry Ranunculaceae 8 5 Adiantum pedatum var. pedatum northern maidenhair fern Pteridaceae Fern/Ally 6 1 Agalinis gattingeri (Gerardia) rough-stemmed gerardia Orobanchaceae 7 5 Agalinis tenuifolia (Gerardia, A. tenuifolia var. common gerardia Orobanchaceae 4 -3 macrophylla) Ageratina altissima var. altissima (Eupatorium rugosum) white snakeroot Asteraceae/Eupatorieae 2 3 Agrimonia parviflora swamp agrimony Rosaceae 5 -1 Agrimonia pubescens downy agrimony Rosaceae 4 5 Agrimonia rostellata woodland agrimony Rosaceae 4 3 Agrostis elliottiana awned bent grass Poaceae/Aveneae 3 5 * Agrostis gigantea redtop Poaceae/Aveneae 0 -3 Agrostis perennans upland bent Poaceae/Aveneae 3 1 Allium canadense var.
    [Show full text]
  • Field Guide to the Moss Genera in New Jersey by Keith Bowman
    Field Guide to the Moss Genera in New Jersey With Coefficient of Conservation and Indicator Status Keith Bowman, PhD 10/20/2017 Acknowledgements There are many individuals that have been essential to this project. Dr. Eric Karlin compiled the initial annotated list of New Jersey moss taxa. Second, I would like to recognize the contributions of the many northeastern bryologists that aided in the development of the initial coefficient of conservation values included in this guide including Dr. Richard Andrus, Dr. Barbara Andreas, Dr. Terry O’Brien, Dr. Scott Schuette, and Dr. Sean Robinson. I would also like to acknowledge the valuable photographic contributions from Kathleen S. Walz, Dr. Robert Klips, and Dr. Michael Lüth. Funding for this project was provided by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2, State Wetlands Protection Development Grant, Section 104(B)(3); CFDA No. 66.461, CD97225809. Recommended Citation: Bowman, Keith. 2017. Field Guide to the Moss Genera in New Jersey With Coefficient of Conservation and Indicator Status. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, New Jersey Forest Service, Office of Natural Lands Management, Trenton, NJ, 08625. Submitted to United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2, State Wetlands Protection Development Grant, Section 104(B)(3); CFDA No. 66.461, CD97225809. i Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Descriptions
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 1, Chapter 7-4A: Water Relations: Leaf Strategies-Structural
    Glime, J. M. 2017. Water Relations: Leaf Strategies – Structural. Chapt. 7-4a. In: Glime, J. M. Bryophyte Ecology. Volume 1. 7-4a-1 Physiological Ecology. Ebook sponsored by Michigan Technological University and the International Association of Bryologists. Last updated 17 July 2020 and available at <http://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/bryophyte-ecology/>. CHAPTER 7-4a WATER RELATIONS: LEAF STRATEGIES – STRUCTURAL TABLE OF CONTENTS Overlapping Leaves .......................................................................................................................................... 7-4a-4 Leaves Curving or Twisting upon Drying ......................................................................................................... 7-4a-5 Thickened Leaf.................................................................................................................................................. 7-4a-5 Concave Leaves ................................................................................................................................................ 7-4a-7 Cucullate Leaves ............................................................................................................................................. 7-4a-10 Plications ......................................................................................................................................................... 7-4a-10 Revolute and Involute Margins ......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 1, Chapter 3-1: Sexuality: Sexual Strategies
    Glime, J. M. and Bisang, I. 2017. Sexuality: Sexual Strategies. Chapt. 3-1. In: Glime, J. M. Bryophyte Ecology. Volume 1. 3-1-1 Physiological Ecology. Ebook sponsored by Michigan Technological University and the International Association of Bryologists. Last updated 3 June 2020 and available at <http://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/bryophyte-ecology/>. CHAPTER 3-1 SEXUALITY: SEXUAL STRATEGIES JANICE M. GLIME AND IRENE BISANG TABLE OF CONTENTS Expression of Sex ......................................................................................................................................... 3-1-2 Unisexual and Bisexual Taxa ........................................................................................................................ 3-1-2 Sex Chromosomes ................................................................................................................................. 3-1-6 An unusual Y Chromosome ................................................................................................................... 3-1-7 Gametangial Arrangement ..................................................................................................................... 3-1-8 Origin of Bisexuality in Bryophytes ............................................................................................................ 3-1-11 Monoicy as a Derived/Advanced Character? ........................................................................................ 3-1-11 Multiple Reversals ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 2, Chapter 18-1: Large Mammals: Ruminants-Cervidae
    Glime, J. M. 2018. Large Mammals: Ruminants – Cervidae. Chapter 18-1. In: Glime, J. M. Bryophyte Ecology. Volume 2. 18-1-1 Bryological Interaction. Ebook sponsored by Michigan Technological University and the International Association of Bryologists. Last updated 19 July 2020 and available at <http://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/bryophyte-ecology2/>. CHAPTER 18-1 LARGE MAMMALS: RUMINANTS - CERVIDAE TABLE OF CONTENTS Ruminantia – Ruminants ...................................................................................................................................................... 18-1-2 Impact of Ruminants on Bryophytes .................................................................................................................................... 18-1-4 Grazing ........................................................................................................................................................................ 18-1-4 Trampling ................................................................................................................................................................... 18-1-12 Manuring .................................................................................................................................................................... 18-1-14 Life on Manure – Splachnaceae ......................................................................................................................................... 18-1-15 Cervidae – Deer, Elk, Moose, and Caribou .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity
    Appendix I Biodiversity Appendix I1 Literature Review – Biodiversity Resources in the Oil Sands Region of Alberta Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014 APPENDIX I1: LITERATURE REVIEW – BIODIVERSITY RESOURCES IN THE OIL SANDS REGION OF ALBERTA TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1.0 BIOTIC DIVERSTY DATA AND SUMMARIES ................................................................ 1 1.1 Definition ............................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Biodiversity Policy and Assessments .................................................................... 1 1.3 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................... 2 1.3.1 Ecosystems ........................................................................................... 2 1.3.2 Biota ...................................................................................................... 7 1.4 Key Issues ............................................................................................................. 9 1.4.1 Alteration of Landscapes and Landforms ............................................. 9 1.4.2 Ecosystem (Habitat) Alteration ........................................................... 10 1.4.3 Habitat Fragmentation and Edge Effects ............................................ 10 1.4.4 Cumulative Effects .............................................................................. 12 1.4.5 Climate Change .................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bryo-Activities: a Review on How Bryophytes Are Contributing to the Arsenal of Natural Bioactive Compounds Against Fungi
    plants Review Bryo-Activities: A Review on How Bryophytes Are Contributing to the Arsenal of Natural Bioactive Compounds against Fungi Mauro Commisso 1,† , Francesco Guarino 2,† , Laura Marchi 3,†, Antonella Muto 4,†, Amalia Piro 5,† and Francesca Degola 6,*,† 1 Department of Biotechnology, University of Verona, Cà Vignal 1, Strada Le Grazie 15, 37134 Verona (VR), Italy; [email protected] 2 Department of Chemistry and Biology, University of Salerno, Via Giovanni Paolo II 132, 84084 Fisciano (SA), Italy; [email protected] 3 Department of Medicine and Surgery, Respiratory Disease and Lung Function Unit, University of Parma, Via Gramsci 14, 43125 Parma (PR), Italy; [email protected] 4 Department of Biology, Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Calabria, Via Ponte P. Bucci 6b, Arcavacata di Rende, 87036 Cosenza (CS), Italy; [email protected] 5 Laboratory of Plant Biology and Plant Proteomics (Lab.Bio.Pro.Ve), Department of Chemistry and Chemical Technologies, University of Calabria, Ponte P. Bucci 12 C, Arcavacata di Rende, 87036 Cosenza (CS), Italy; [email protected] 6 Department of Chemistry, Life Sciences and Environmental Sustainability, University of Parma, Parco delle Scienze 11/A, 43124 Parma (PR), Italy * Correspondence: [email protected] † All authors equally contributed to the manuscript. Abstract: Usually regarded as less evolved than their more recently diverged vascular sisters, which currently dominate vegetation landscape, bryophytes seem having nothing to envy to the defensive arsenal of other plants, since they had acquired a suite of chemical traits that allowed them to Citation: Commisso, M.; Guarino, F.; adapt and persist on land. In fact, these closest modern relatives of the ancestors to the earliest Marchi, L.; Muto, A.; Piro, A.; Degola, F.
    [Show full text]
  • ESTABLISHMENT of the MOSS Polytrichum Juniperinum HEDW
    673 Original Article ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MOSS Polytrichum juniperinum HEDW. UNDER AXENIC CONDITIONS ESTABELECIMENTO E DESENVOLVIMENTO DO MUSGO Polytrichum juniperinum HEDW. SOB CONDIÇÕES DE CULTIVO AXÊNICO Filipe de Carvalho VICTORIA 1; Antônio Costa de OLIVEIRA 2; José Antônio PETERS 3 1. Biologist, MSc in Botany, Graduate Student in Biotecnology-UFPEL, Antartic Plants Studies Core, UNIPAMPA, São Gabriel, RS, Brazil. [email protected] ; 2. PhD in Genetics, Plants Genomics Center, UFPEL, Pelotas, RS, Brazil; 3. PhD in Botany, Plants Tissues Cultive Laboratory, UFPEL, Pelotas, RS, Brazil. RESUMO: Polytrichum juniperinum Hedw. (Polytrichaceae) é uma espécie de musgo de ampla distribuição, ocorrendo em ambos os hemisférios. Culturas in vitro foram estabelecidas a partir de esporos de espécimes coletados na natureza. O desenvolvimento, tanto de protonema quanto de gametófitos, foi observado utilizando o meio básico MS em três tratamentos, livre de fitorreguladores, suplementados com uma fonte de auxina (AIA), suplementados com uma fonte de citocinina (BAP) e suplementado com ambos reguladores. Nos cultivos resultantes de meio livre de reguladores e de meios contendo auxina, foi observado o desenvolvimento total dos gametófitos, enquanto nos meios contendo citocinina não foram observados desenvolvimento e regeneração de gametófitos. Estes resultados sugerem a utilização do meio livre de reguladores para cultivo de Polytrichum juniperinum em cultivos axênicos. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Desenvolvimento in vitro . Polytrichum juniperinum. Meio
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Common Macrolichens and Bryophytes of the Umatilla National
    United States Department of Agriculture Guide to Common Forest Macrolichens and Service Umatilla Bryophytes of the National Forest 2006 Umatilla National Forest Alison M. Kelly 1 IMPORTANT NOTES This guide is based on an initial survey of the bryophytes and macrolichens of the Umatilla National Forest. It should be considered a STARTING POINT—common taxa are represented, but this is not a complete inventory. It is hoped that this guide will aid in the identification of some common macrolichens and bryophytes of the Umatilla, and in awareness of a few sensitive taxa. Determinations should always be compared with herbarium material and full descriptions. This book has two main sections, macrolichens and bryophytes. Keys to the genera of the lichens are presented first and are followed by keys to species and then pictures and short descrip- tions of the taxa. In the second section, there is a key to the bryophyte species, followed again by the pictures and descriptions. Keys and descrip- tions of the taxa are based on the references listed, and sensitive taxa are noted as such. A checklist of the mosses known to occur on the Forest is presented at the end, along with an index to taxa. Where look-alike taxa are mentioned, they are known, suspected, or potentially found in eastern Oregon. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS-- Thanks to the Umatilla National Forest, Scott Riley and Jean Wood for supporting this update. The Herbarium at the University of Washington was extremely helpful in providing specimens. Judy Harpel, Wilf Schofield, and Martin Hutton provided important contributions. This guide is dedicated to the late Stuart Markow - his constant curiosity, excellent contributions, and joy for all plants remain an inspiration.
    [Show full text]
  • Bryophytes and Herbivory
    Cryptogamie,Bryologie,2006,27 (1):191-203 ©2006 Adac.Tous droits réservés Bryophytes and Herbivory Janice M.GLIME * Department of Biological Sciences,Michigan Technological University, 1400 Townsend Dr.,Houghton,MI 49931,USA [email protected] (Received 13 August 2005,accepted 30 November 2005) Abstract – This paper reviews briefly some possible defenses available to bryophytes and provides experimental evidence that suggests the role of phenolic compounds and tough- ness in defense. It indicates that in some cases toughness or nutrition may outweigh phe- nolic deterrents in determining what invertebrates eat.When given,apparently,only phenolic content as a difference between two populations of Fontinalis antipyretica,the aquatic isopod Asellus militaris selected the plants with the lower phenolic content. Presence of higher concentrations of phenolic compounds in shade plants than in sun plants contradicts the Carbon/Nutrient Balance hypothesis and suggests that slow-growing bryophytes may differ from tracheophytes in producing defenses rather than other carbon compounds.This review indicates that bryophytes may exhibit multiple means of feeding deterrency and that further study is needed. Ecology / phenolic compounds / secondary compounds / sun and shade / Isopoda / slugs / antiherbivory / defense / Fontinalis , Polytrichum Traditionally botanists have considered bryophytes to be inedible,citing as evidence their safety in herbaria where beetles devoured any unprotected flow- ering plants.However,it is becoming increasing clear that this is not the case for all bryophytes.A great number of potential predators and pathogens,such as bac- teria, fungi,nematodes,mites,insects,mammals,and other herbivorous animals, surround plants,and especially bryophytes,in a natural ecosystem (Rhoades & Cates,1976; Taiz & Zeiger,1991).
    [Show full text]